Daschle cosponsers Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act

[-..__...]

Sarah Brady and company must be having a stroke over this bit of good news...

"BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR S. 659 CONTINUES TO GROW

On September 25, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) joined 54 of his colleagues as a co-sponsor of S. 659, the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act." This critically important legislation seeks to protect America`s firearms manufacturers and dealers from malicious lawsuits aimed at bankrupting a law-abiding American industry. In April, the U.S. House of Representatives passed its version of the legislation by an overwhelming bipartisan
margin of 285 to 140. Senator Daschle`s decision to support this measure as a cosponsor sends yet another clear message that support for this common sense legislation transcends party lines. We hope that fellow Senators will follow the lead of the U.S. House of
Representatives and vote to protect one of America`s oldest industries from these predatory lawsuits".

[greenwow]

1. Why in the hell would you call that good news?

Protecting those criminals is not a good thing. They are responsible for the killing of thousands of children per year. Protecting them from liability when they break the law and when they kill children is not a good thing. We should be talking about how to stop these killers rather than how to preempt the legal system to protect them.

[MrBenchley]

4. This is disgraceful

and shameful in every way.

[-..__...]

11. I'll make sure that...

I convey your sentiments to the good Senator when I write to him applauding his decision.

[-..__...]

12. Another nail in the Brady coffin.

"Why in the hell would you call that good news?"

Because at the peak of this lawsuit nonsense there was something like 33 cities and other interested parties making allegations ranging from "creating a public nuisance" to a "disproportionate number of blacks have been killed as a result of the careless actions of gun makers". To date, none of these bogus lawsuits have resulted in a final finding for the plaintiffs. Most have been dismissed or simply granted a continuance.

These lawsuits aren't about seeking justice; they're a well coordinated and planned attempt at bankrupting a legitimate industry and nothing else. It's not about justice or denying the "aggrieved" their day in court. The Brady types have to bear the responsibility and blame for this legislation. They've failed miserably through other avenues. This lawsuit approach is an act of desperation.

Really though? I just see it as a bitch slap to the bottom feeding, anti-gun bloodsuckers. Having this bill passed will be a major upset and setback for the troop of baboons at Brady/VPC/MMM.

"They are responsible for the killing of thousands of children per year."

"Killing of thousands of children per year"?... really now? To the best of my knowledge, even the propagandists at Brady/VPC/MMM haven't claimed that. Please provide a cite for your figures.

[greenwow]

17. Sigh

> Because at the peak of this lawsuit nonsense...

Nonsense? Protecting children in nonsense? Don't you care?

> a "disproportionate number of blacks have been killed as a result of the careless actions of gun makers".

That's true. So you claim that isn't? What type of racist garbage is that? Blacks, and especially young black men, are the victims of the industry of death.

> planned attempt at bankrupting a legitimate industry

Oh please. It hasn't bankrupted any company. Also, why use the phrase "legitimate industry?" No industry that profits from the deaths of children is legitimate.

Also, why would you disagree with the fact that so many children are killed by guns every year? Why lie about it? From one study from the Justice Department, "every day in America, 16 children are killed by guns every two hours." That's over 70,000 children a year. Again, why are you lieing about it?

[BullDozer]

19. Incredibly wrong!

From one study from the Justice Department, "every day in America, 16 children are killed by guns every two hours." That's over 70,000 children a year. Again, why are you lieing about it?

You aren't even close to having a valid statistic there.

The TOTALnumber is less than 29,000.

1999 gun-death toll was 28,874 persons.

The death rate for boys and girls under the age of 20 was 3,365 in 1999.

Suicides have accounted for more than half of the annual gun deaths.

These numbers are still FAR too high but they aren't even close to that 70,000 children number you pulled out from who knows where.

[Withergyld]

20. more data

The National Center for Health Statistics has released preliminary mortality data for 2001.

This is a large (2.1 MB) pdf file. The data I am quoting is on page 17 of this report (Table 2)

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr51/nvsr51_05.pdf

I find the following firearm related causes of death:
Accidental Discharge: 924
Suicide : 16,445
Homicide: 11,001
Undetermined intent 222 (from page 18)
total 28,592 (from adding above figures)

Assuming All the accidental discharge deaths were children and undetermined were also children the total is 1146. Divide this by 365 and there are on average 3.14 deaths per day due to firearms. This is not even close to 16 every two hours. Not even 16 every two DAYS.

I am not trying to minimize deaths caused by firearms. Every child that dies is a tragedy. I am trying to show valid data.

[BullDozer]

22. Double check your source

It gets even bleaker for the claimed 70,000 number when I get home, have a cup of coffee and search the NCIPC database.

Firearms related deaths deaths ages 0-17

2000 1544 of which 537 were suicides
1999 1776 of which 558 were suicides
1998 1971 of which 648 were suicides
1997 2284 of which 679 were suicides
1996 2523 of which 720 were suicides
1995 3034 of which 836 were suicides
1994 3318 of which 902 were suicides
1993 3291 of which 832 were suicides
1992 3048 of which 821 were suicides
1991 2945 of which 788 were suicides
1990 2698 of which 758 were suicides

70,000 a year you say? How so?

[Axman]

24. It is nonsense and a very dangerous...

precident that these lawsuits are setting. By your argument, protecting the children is the number one concern. I guess all other consumer products on the market that exist in which have been instrumental in the death of a child are fair game.

Being black, I suppose I have a better idea of what is happening in the black community...especially concerning where I grew up. I know for a fact that it isn't anyone's fault but those in the community that allow this stuff to happen. Most people just cannot accept the truth and take responsibility for their own actions. I've lost family to violence. Both by guns and by other means.

Forgive me but I need to say something. I get really offended by people that make ascertations about the black community when they really have no clue what is really going on. I despise Jesse Jackson because he came into my neighborhood and tried to lay the blame on the whites. He told me that my aunt's death was the fault of the "rich white folks". Even at the age of 16, I KNEW that the problem was home grown. We did it to ourselves. I firmly believe that we as a whole wanted to do it to ourselves. I for one, could not and did not accept that. So if you want to do something about us blacks being disproportionately killed by violence, look for the real solution and not some easy blame solution that won't make a damned bit of difference.

And to play the Devil's Advocate, You state the following..."No industry that profits from the deaths of children is legitimate." I suppose you oppose abortion then, and stem cell research?

[demsrule4life]

25. That is something I cannot understand

is that most of the anti-gunners, anti death penalty folks are for abortion.

[jody]

2. Daschle finally understands. Better late than never. eom

[7th_Sephiroth]

3. Guns are legal

They are legal, its leagl to make them, its legal to sell them, its legal to buy them (with proper permits) those who use guns illegally usually get them illegally, modify them illegally or so on. its the person who uses them illegally that is to blame for the murders, as for accidents, one can only blame the gun owner for not storeing the gun properly and keeping the ammo in a different room.

[MrBenchley]

5. So are lots of products

And you don't see other industries pushing for this sort of blanket immunity....of course, damn few have as much to hide as the corrupt gun industry.

[Withergyld]

6. I don't think so...

It looks more like them trying to protect themselves from legislation by lawsuit.

[MrBenchley]

7. Yeah, surrrrrrrre.....

[Withergyld]

8. That was

a convincing argument:think:

[MrBenchley]

9. All that was needed....

"A judge in Tacoma, Washington Friday ruled that a lawsuit brought by nine families of the Washington, DC-area sniper attacks against the gun dealer and manufacturer that supplied the assault rifle used in the shootings should proceed toward trial. The court rebuffed arguments by Tacoma gun dealer Bull's Eye Shooter Supply and assault rifle manufacturer Bushmaster Firearms that they are immune from responsibility for supplying guns to criminals.

Judge Frank Cuthbertson's ruling comes as Congress considers legislation to grant sweeping legal immunity to the gun industry from civil litigation. The legislation - already passed by the House of Representatives (H.R. 1036) and pending in the Senate (S. 659) - threatens to override the court's ruling and require the immediate dismissal of the sniper victims' case against Bull's Eye and Bushmaster, without allowing the sniper victims to present any evidence to a judge or jury."

http://www.bradycampaign.com/press/release.asp?Record=493

[Withergyld]

10. Ok

"NEWTOWN, CT. -- New Jersey Federal Court Judge Jerome B. Simandle dismissed Camden County, New Jersey's lawsuit against the firearms industry on December 5, finding that the County had no standing to sue because it could not show that the firearm manufacturers' distribution and sale of legal, non-defective products in compliance with extensive federal and state laws and regulations caused a public nuisance or caused the County to incur governmental costs to prevent, prosecute and punish gun crimes."
http://www.nssf.org/releases/camden.htm

OR

A D.C. Superior Court judge yesterday dismissed a lawsuit filed by the D.C. government and victims of gun violence against the nation's major firearms makers and distributors, dealing a blow to city officials and gun control advocates.

"In the first case of its kind in the District, Judge Cheryl M. Long ruled that the lawsuit was so fundamentally flawed and unpersuasive that it failed to meet the standard for moving forward. The judge tossed out claims to hold the gun industry accountable as a "public nuisance" and rejected the D.C. government's argument that it was entitled to be reimbursed for police work, Medicaid costs and other expenses related to gun violence."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A64504-2002Dec16¬Found=true

OR

"The City of New Orleans continues to set precedents when it comes to reckless lawsuits designed to bankrupt the nation's gun manufacturers—but most are not the kind its mayor hoped for. New Orleans was the first city to file a reckless lawsuit against the firearms industry, under the orders of anti-gun Mayor Marc Morial (D), setting the stage for more than two dozen that followed. The New Orleans suit, however, was also the first to be rejected by a state supreme court earlier this year. And on Tuesday, the Supreme Court of the United States let stand the April 3 ruling by the Louisiana Supreme Court, making the New Orleans suit the first of its kind to be rejected by the highest court in the land."
http://www.nra.org/frame.cfm?title=NRA%20Institute%20for%20Legislative%20Action&url=http://www.nraila.org

edited to fix links

[-..__...]

13. I like this one...

What's a poor gun-grabber to do? :)


"Court Allows Grunow Lawsuit to Go Forward Case Will Go to Trial Later This Year

The widow of schoolteacher Barry Grunow has won an important victory in her
lawsuit against the distributor that supplied the semi-automatic pistol used by seventh-grader Nathaniel Brazill to shoot and kill Mr. Grunow in his classroom in Lake Worth, Florida in May 2000. Pamela Grunow is seeking to hold the distributor, Valor Corporation of Florida, responsible for selling an
unreasonably dangerous and defective product.

In a decision dated May 10, 2002, Judge Jorge Labarga of the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial District, in Palm Beach County, Florida, ruled that Mrs. Grunow has presented sufficient evidence to entitle her to present her claims against Valor to a jury. The trial is expected to begin in October or
November of this year. "Gun sellers should have foreseen that a juvenile would gain access to this gun," said Allen Rostron, attorney for the Legal Action Project of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which serves as
co-counsel for the Grunow family. "Guns can be made to protect against their unauthorized use by children and teenagers. These businesses have a responsibility to take reasonable steps to prevent the products they sell from being used to cause harm."

On May 26, 2000, the last day of the school year at Lake Worth Middle School, 13-year-old student Nathaniel Brazill shot and killed language arts teacher Barry Grunow. A few days before the shooting, Brazill had taken the gun and ammunition from an unlocked dresser in the home of Elmore McCray, a
close family friend. Brazill has been convicted of second-degree murder for killing Mr. Grunow. The Grunow family has already voluntarily resolved claims against Elmore McCray and a pawnshop that sold the gun".

More...


"SAF APPLAUDS FLORIDA JUDGE FOR SETTING ASIDE GUN VERDICT

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) today applauded Palm beach County Circuit
Judge Jorge Labarga for setting aside the outrageous $1.2 million verdict against the Valor Corporation for distributing the firearm used by 13-year-old Nathaniel Brazill to murder his teacher over two years ago.

"Judge Labarga has allowed common sense and the rule of law to prevail over emotion," observed SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. "The Valor verdict defied logic by holding the Valor Corporation responsible for the willful act of a
young thug. Nathaniel Brazill, who stole the pistol used to gun down Lake Worth Middle School teacher Barry Grunow, is solely responsible for that crime, and not the distributor." Grunow's widow, Pamela, represented by lawyers from the anti-gun Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, had sued Valor, claiming that the distributor could have made the .25-caliber Raven semiautomatic pistol safer by
installing some type of locking device. Because the jury ruled that the pistol was not defective, Judge Labarga ruled their monetary award to Grunow to be inconsistent with that finding.

"Once again, the Brady Center's attempts to hold the firearms industry responsible for the vicious acts of criminals, regardless of their age, have been thwarted," Gottlieb noted. "Valor distributed a product that was not defective. Installation of a trigger lock or some other device may or may not have prevented the young killer from using that particular gun, but it would likely not have stopped him from committing the murder.

More...

[BullDozer]

23. That's an interesting case that was discussed here once.

Important facts are that:

In May 2000 Pan Grunows husband, Barry Grunow a school teacher was shot and killed by his 13 year old student Nathaniel Brazill who stole the gun used from Mr McCray.

The gun manufactured by Raven Arms (a serious fire in November 1991 put them out of business) was sold to Valor (a distributor who sells to dealers) to Hypoluxo Pawn Shop, who it appears sold the pistol to a person who's name I don't have in or around 1987, who then gave or sold the gun to McCray, whom the pistol was stolen from a few days before the shooting.

A lawsuit was brought (with the help of the Brady Center to Prevent Handgun Violence) on behalf of Grunow's wife and two young children against wholesale distributor Valor Corporation and retail dealer Hypoluxo Pawn Shop. McCray and the school board were not defendants in the suit.


The suit by Pam Grunow asked for $76 million, but the jury agreed on $24 million.. The school board was found to be 45% at fault ($10.8 million), the family friend McCray was found to be 50% at fault ($12 million) and Valor was found to be 5% at fault ($1.2 million).


Before the jury trial started Hypoluxo Pawn Shop settled for $275,000 in lieu of facing litigation and before the complaint was even filed, the Grunow family obtained a settlement of its claims against McCray for $300,000.

Grunow had agreed not to sue the school board in exchange for an annuity that will provide income equal to the amount her husband would have earned before retirement.

The murderer wasn't found to have any responsibility in this case because per the judges instructions they only way for him to be found liable in this regard was if the shooting was an accident. He was however sentenced to 28 years in prison at hsi trial.

Notice how all of the "at fault parties" except for Valor had settlements in place before the verdict?

Two months later Palm Beach Circuit Judge Jorge Labarga, who presided over the trial, ruled that the distributor could not be penalized if the gun was properly made.

Labarga said the jury's November verdict contradicted itself.

On the one hand, jurors faulted Valor for supplying a gun without ''feasible safety measures.'' But on the same verdict form, jurors said the gun itself -- a small, cheap .25-caliber weapon easily clasped by a 12-year-old -- was not defective or lacking in reasonable safety measures.

That, Labarga wrote, ``rendered the verdict fatally inconsistent.''

Grunow is appealing that decision.

Valor filed suit seeking to recover their legal costs from Grunow.

[MrBenchley]

14. Gee, you'd think

if all those lawsuits are so meritless, the gun industry wouldn't need its scummy GOP firends to help it hide.

[Withergyld]

15. Since when was...

Sen. Daschle GOP?

From the first post:

"BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR S. 659 CONTINUES TO GROW

On September 25, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) joined 54 of his colleagues as a co-sponsor of S. 659, the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act." This critically important legislation seeks to protect America`s firearms manufacturers and dealers from malicious lawsuits aimed at bankrupting a law-abiding American industry. In April, the U.S. House of Representatives passed its version of the legislation by an overwhelming bipartisan margin of 285 to 140. Senator Daschle`s decision to support this measure as a cosponsor sends yet another clear message that support for this common sense legislation transcends party lines. We hope that fellow Senators will follow the lead of the U.S. House of
Representatives and vote to protect one of America`s oldest industries from these predatory lawsuits".

I hope you can do better then name calling :shrug:

[MrBenchley]

16. Is this really such a hard concept to grasp?

The bill is shameful, and I hope the threatened filibuster comes to pass.

[Withergyld]

21. what concept is that??

I know that you feel gun manufacurers are scum and that this bill is shameful. I disagree, you have yet to convince me that gun manufacturers are scum and that this law is disgraceful.

[MrBenchley]

26. Which is why they're scuttling for protection

as no other industry is.

As for whether they're scum, just take a look at the Bullseye Gun Shop in Tacoma.

[Withergyld]

27. what a pantload

you use one example to "label" the rest of the industry??

Why are the seeking protection? What other group has faced as many lawsuits that failed? I can not think of one that found the gun manufacturers liable. Of all theses suits that have been filed show me where one has succeced.

[MrBenchley]

28. Gee, you show me

anything that the industry has done about this scumbag, besides rally to his defennse...

"What other group has faced as many lawsuits that failed?"
What other industry has a history of such scummy behavior?

[Withergyld]

29. I asked first eom

:evilgrin:

[BullDozer]

31. piffle

and what exactly has Bullseye done that makes them scum?

Have a gun stolen from them which is later used in multiple killings?

Legally sell a gun to Buford Furrow July 6, 1997, which was not one of the guns he used in his killings. This was a time when he was still legal to purchase, own, or possess firearms. Furow didn't spend time in a mental facility , and commit assault while in it, until 1998.

Wow I guess being a crime victim and making legal firearms sales qualifies for being scum in Benchleys book.

as no other industry is.

Wrong buster: http://www.courttv.com/people/2003/0620/fastfood_ap.html
http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/food/Pelman_v_McDonalds_SDNY_brief.htm

I suppose that you also think the lawsuit that names Boeing as a defendant being responsible for the Sept 11th attacks because they didn't make hijacker proof cockpit doors standard equipment on all of their planes is ok too?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2003/09/10/cnair10.xml

[Spoonman]

18. This has got to be the best news

posted on J/PS in the last six months.

It is a clear indication that the emotionally charged, off on a rant people are having little influence on the D/P as a whole.

Tom Daschle = "REAL" Democrat? Yes!

[BullDozer]

30. Lets see that the Brady bunch has to say

"The changes in the amendment would do nothing to protect the legal rights of gun violence victims with cases pending in our courts."

Gee it's called "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act." not the expand the ability for people to sue, lose as usual, and still cost the companies millions of dollars in defending themselves act.

According to the Bradys analysis it would make a real case by a victim even stronger then it is now because according to the Bradys the limit of criminal action standard to be met is being lowered.